Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120
04/14/2017 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB200 | |
| HB208 | |
| HB1 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 1 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 13 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 200 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 208 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 1-ELECTION REGISTRATION AND VOTING
2:05:57 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 1, "An Act relating to absentee voting, voting,
and voter registration; relating to early voting locations at
which persons may vote absentee ballots; and providing for an
effective date."
2:06:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS TUCK, Alaska State Legislature, pointed out
the importance of every Alaskan having the opportunity to have
their voices heard in an election process, and paraphrased the
sponsor statement as follows [original punctuation provided]:
The right to vote embodies the spirit of American
democracy. Casting a vote is the most discretely
effective way to have one's voice heard in the
political process. When we exercise our right to vote
we impact our community far beyond an election: we are
able to elect individuals who will make decisions on
our behalf about how our government will be run, set
the policies that will guide our state, and how
resources, both national and local, are distributed.
Unfortunately, a surprising number of Americans don't
exercise their right to vote. On average, only about
half of eligible US voters cast ballots. Although,
Alaska is one of a handful of states which exceeded 50
percent voter turnout in 2014, almost half of Alaskan
voters are effectively not being heard.
House Bill 1 includes a series of changes designed to
increase voter participation and access to voting
across the state by improving and clarifying the
voting process. These changes include:
Providing same day voter registration to allow
all eligible Alaskans the opportunity to vote;
Enhancing online voter registration with
electronic signatures to make the registration
process quicker and easier;
Ensuring the same early voting locations are
available during every election;
Creating on option for permanent absentee voting
for individuals that plan to vote by mail every
year; and
Clarifying and unifying terminology for early
voting to remove confusion between early voting
and absentee in-person voting.
By adopting the changes in House Bill 1, we can take a
step forward to increase the voice of all Alaskans.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK explained that the House State Affairs
Standing Committee hearings received feedback from the Division
of Elections seeking to clean-up and basically update Title 15,
which had not been updated since the 1960s. He pointed out that
part of the clean-up language was bringing Alaska's statutes up-
to-date with the current procedures of the Division of
Elections.
2:08:47 PM
KENDRA KLOSTER, Staff, Representative Chris Tuck, Alaska State
Legislature, explained that Section 1 removes language requiring
a voter to register before an election within 30 days, as a
voter can register to vote the same day they vote but they must
have lived in their district for 30 days.
MS. KLOSTER advised that Sec. 2 permits a person, registering or
reregistering as a voter, to apply using an electronic
signature.
2:10:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked the sponsor to describe any
concerns or feedback from the public as to registering and
voting the same day versus the 30 day requirement.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK responded that the only concerns received
were with regard to verification at the time the ballot was
counted. He noted that, similar to Alaska's early voting or in-
person absentee voting, the ballots are always under review
prior to being counted.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD commented that she had heard opposition
with regard to the 30 day versus "the no requirement for a 30
day election."
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK clarified that currently a person can vote
in-person absentee and change their voter registration within 10
days of the election. He explained that the first section of
the legislation allows a first time voter to change their voter
registration within 10 days of the election as well as a person
previously allowed to vote. He further explained that the
questioned ballot and absentee ballot serves the dual purpose of
being a ballot, and also a place to indicate any changes. He
further explained that Section 1 allows a voter to vote down the
ballot, and not just the top of the ballot.
2:12:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked whether the voter still had to
register 30 days prior, but they could change their
registration.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK disagreed, and clarified that Section 1
requires a voter to be a resident 30 days prior to voting, the
residency requirement remains in statute and in the Constitution
of the State of Alaska. Section 1 allows a voter who has been a
resident [of a district] longer than 30 days to register to vote
and vote up to the same day of the election, he said.
2:13:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to page 2, line 2, of the bill
and asked whether "jurisdiction" represented another state or
country.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK pointed out that the language currently
exists under AS 15.07, and paraphrased from page 2, line 2, "and
is not registered to vote in another jurisdiction outside of the
State of Alaska."
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to the bill, page 2, line 2, and
paraphrased "is not registered to vote in another jurisdiction."
He asked whether there was a mechanism by which someone
registered in another state could unregister before the election
day. He commented that in the event the legislation announces
to Alaskans they can register without waiting the 30 days, he
said he would hate for someone to show up to vote but could not
vote because this language says they cannot have registered to
vote previously.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK deferred to the Division of Elections to
speak to how the division currently deals with that issue. He
advised that last year Alaska joined the Electronic Registration
Information Center (ERIC) system, which is a manner in which to
verify a person's voter registration in another state. He
commented that Representative Eastman's question was whether or
not someone could unregister from another state to be certain
they were not in violation of this statute, and deferred to Ms.
Kloster.
MS. KLOSTER advised that when registering to vote in Alaska,
there is a box to mark on the ballot indicating whether the
person is registered to vote in another state, and when that box
is marked the person is removed from the voter rolls in the
other state. Currently, she said, in order to vote in the
election the person must have lived in Alaska for 30 days, with
the exception that they could vote for the president of the
United States. However, this reads that Alaska's same day voter
registration allows the person to vote down ballot, but it does
not change the requirement that the person must have lived in
the state or district for 30 days.
2:15:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN surmised that the registration and un-
registration is automatic on the day the person fills out the
form, which could be the day of the election. He asked why this
bill maintained that language because the statute says, "You
know, you can do this as long you're not registered." He opined
that the un-registration process was not automatic and it would
not allow him to un-register from another state, then register
to vote in Alaska, and then vote all on the same day.
MS. KLOSTER deferred to the Division of Elections, and said that
currently, in order for the division to be certain the person
was not voting in two separate states and was within the 30 day
mark, the person would vote a questioned ballot allowing the
information to be authenticated before the vote was actually
counted.
2:17:17 PM
MS. KLOSTER, continuing the sectional analysis, advised that
Sec. 2, permits a person registering or reregistering as a voter
to apply using an electronic signature, such as "My Alaska" and
in the manner in which a person registers for the permanent fund
dividend. She advised that Sec. 3, allows that the director of
the Division of Elections determine the form of the electronic
signature and a definition that works best for the division.
Ms. Kloster said that Sec. 4, allows a qualified voter to
register on the same day of the election or within 30 days of
residency. She explained that Sec. 5, amends the section
referring to the form of the voter's certificate [used for
voting an absentee in-person, special needs, or questioned
ballot] and the person can include any information they would
like to change. The section also adds the language "special
needs." Sec. 6, she advised, makes certain the absentee or
questioned ballot includes a "special needs ballot" under that
definition. Sec. 7, clarifies that a voter registering or
reregistering would vote a questioned ballot, which would then
be reviewed to make certain the person was a qualified voter,
she said.
[Ms. Kloster skipped Sec. 8 in the sectional analysis.]
2:18:57 PM
MS. KLOSTER noted that Sec. 9, is clean-up language referring to
voting absentee or questioned ballot. Sec. 10, she said, "Again
the same thing." Sec. 11, clarifies the terminology for early
voting, rather than absentee or absentee in-person voting, she
explained.
2:19:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD referred to Secs. 10 and 11, and asked
Ms. Kloster to explain the sections and the new language.
MS. KLOSTER responded that the current terminology is "absentee
or absentee in-person" voting, meaning early voting two weeks
prior to the election. There was some confusion, she noted, as
to what absentee in-person voting actually meant so the sponsor
changed the terminology to say that it is all called "early
voting."
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD surmised that under Sec. 11, in the
event a person votes absentee by mail, or votes at an early
voting station and votes in-person, the terminology would now be
"early voting."
MS. KLOSTER answered that Representative Reinbold was correct
and explained that none of the procedures were changed within
the Division of Elections, the bill simply changes the
terminology.
2:21:31 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN referred to the bill, page 4, and noted that Ms.
Kloster advised that the goal was to change the terminology to
"early voting" and do away with [the current terminology]. Yet,
he pointed out, absentee voting was listed three to four times
on the page. He then asked that if the goal was to change the
terminology to early voting, why does the bill still call it
absentee voting.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK responded that the reason was due to current
statutes. Sec. 9, he explained, relates to a person claiming to
be a registered voter but for whom no evidence of registration
could be located in the precinct, that person would then vote
absentee or questioned ballot. In that manner, he further
explained, verification would happen after the person voted and
prior to the ballot being counted.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK, in response to Representative Reinbold's
question, answered that the State of Alaska has only six actual
early voting locations. At those locations information can be
immediately verified as to where a person currently lived, their
exact precinct number, and their vote would be counted without
any question. There are 181 locations where a person can vote
absentee in-person up to 15 days prior to the election. It was
discovered during the 2014 election that many people were turned
away and told they couldn't vote absentee because they were
present to vote, he advised. The intent of this legislation is
clarification and the committee will continue to see absentee
and questioned ballots listed through the statutes. The
presentation would get to the sections calling it "early
voting," he advised.
2:23:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD referred to Sec. 9, and asked the
sponsor to drill down as to his goal in changing the language.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK reiterated that in the event a person's
information could not be verified at the time of voting, they
could vote absentee or questioned ballot and their eligibility
would be verified during the time it was necessary to count that
ballot.
2:24:25 PM-
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX described the legislation as attempting to
make the process consistent, which was a good thing. She asked
whether the division had shared the reason for the somewhat
convoluted and arcane manner of early voting and then absentee
in-person voting terminology.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK described the evolutionary process as
follows: initially, there was absentee voting because the person
could not make it to their polling location or was out-of-state;
it then evolved to an absentee mail-in ballot for the
convenience of voting and not leaving home; it then evolved into
opening stations for those who preferred to vote early and
called it absentee in-person voting; and the intent of the
legislation is consistency throughout. He added there are also
special needs voting and other voting methods to keep
consistent. He related that this bill turned into a cleanup
bill for Title 15.
2:26:07 PM
MS. KLOSTER, in continuing the sectional analysis, advised that
Sec. 12, clarifies the privileges of poll watchers and brings
the statutes up-to-date while clarifying the current practice of
allowing individuals to watch what is going on while people are
voting. The language changes an "initiative or referendum" to
"ballot proposition" to include both initiative and referendum.
This section also clarifies in statute that the candidate, a
group, or an organization is allowed one or more poll watchers,
which is the division's current practice, she advised.
2:27:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked the definition of "party" for this
section because the statewide definition of what constitute a
party is that it must have a certain number of voters. He
commented that this discussion has been at the precinct level
and that a precinct could have 90 percent to 100 percent of its
voters belonging to a party that was not large enough to be
considered a statewide party. Under the current language, he
opined that party would not be qualified to have a poll watcher.
MS. KLOSTER replied that the bill does not change the definition
and pointed out that the bill read "a candidate" and a candidate
would be able to have a poll watcher. In speaking with the
division, she said it had advised it "doesn't really turn away
people that want to come and poll watch." She remarked that the
division had not run into any issues at this point, and
clarified that "anyone that is running and they want to be
there, whether it be a ballot proposition or a candidate that's
running, no matter what party they are in, they can have someone
there."
2:28:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether it was her understanding
that a group not large enough to be a party could qualify under
this language.
MS. KLOSTER answered that the sponsor envisioned this was
inclusive of everyone of any group.
2:29:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX commented that many years ago she was in a
situation where the division would not let her have an
individual poll watcher in the general election because it
wanted to leave that totally to the party. She stated that if
this is what the division is doing currently, it is a good idea
to clarify the intent.
MS. KLOSTER said the sponsor wanted the intent in the statute to
avoid issues in the future.
2:30:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to the bill, page 5, line 7, and
described the language as distinguishing candidates representing
a political party from candidates who do not represent a
political party. In the event the idea is to be inclusive to
all candidates, possibly the limiting language should be
removed.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK advised that the language does not allow
just any public member to be a poll watcher, and referred to
[Sec. 15.10.170(a)] page 5, lines 1-6], which read as follows:
(a) In a general election, special election, or special
runoff election under AS 15.40.141, a [THE] precinct party
committee, where an organized precinct committee exists, or the
party district committee where no organized precinct committee
exists, or the state party chair [CHAIRPERSON] where neither a
precinct nor a party district committee exists, ...
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK referred to page 6, where, he said, the
language allows it to be opened up for others, and opined the
language is all inclusive. He acknowledged that the language
does not include "just anyone who wants to be a poll watcher
that's not sanctioned by a party, or a candidate, or a ballot
initiative, or one way or the other."
2:32:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked that staff provide the "exact,
what it does versus the comparison" of what the bill changes.
She asked Representative Tuck whether he had said the language
opens it up to almost anyone that wants to be a poll watcher.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK answered that the language opens it up to
almost anyone, but there are conditions. Basically, he
explained, any organization or organized group that sponsors or
poses a ballot proposition or recall, may appoint one or more
watchers at each precinct or counting centers for each
individual candidate rather than solely a party.
CHAIR CLAMAN referred to Representative Reinbold's request [for
staff to prepare a comparison] of the previous process versus
the current process, and reminded her that the capitalized
letters in brackets depict the language being removed from
statute, and the bolded underlined language depicts the language
being added. Therefore, he remarked, Representative Reinbold
already has the information as to how the language was being
changed from existing statute.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD commented that she must email to
inquiring constituents, and she was happy to do that, but
sometimes constituents have a difficult time with the brackets
and underlining.
MS. KLOSTER advised that she had prepared a document identifying
what each section depicted on one line and she could send it to
Representative Reinbold. It was important to the sponsor, she
described, "that we didn't just let a whole bunch of people in
there into the poll watching" in order to keep the area clear
for people voting.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD said that was her exact concern as she
has several people in her district "doing this for a long, long,
long time" who want a thorough explanation, especially regarding
Secs. 12 and 13.
2:34:49 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to the bill, page 5, line 16,
wherein language was being removed that dealt with citizenship
requirements, and he did not see that language coming back up in
other areas of the bill. He asked whether there was concern
that not enough foreign poll watchers were allowed at the
polling places.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK referred to Sec. 13, and explained that
Title 15 was being reorganized and cleaned-up to make certain it
read well, and page 6, lines 17-18, read, "A watcher must be a
United States citizen."
CHAIR CLAMAN explained to Representative Eastman that there are
instances where a sponsor starts with a bill and people start
thinking of amendments to try to make it bigger and better,
thereby making a small bill into a big bill. This is an
instance where the sponsor started with a small bill long enough
ago that someone decided to make it into a big bill before it
came to the House Judiciary Standing Committee, he further
explained.
2:36:08 PM
MS. KLOSTER, in continuing the sectional analysis, advised that
in moving things around, the language deleted from Sec. 12 was
placed into Sec. 13. She said that Sec. 14 added a declaration
attesting to the truth and accuracy of the information offered
as to the same day voter registration questioned ballot.
MS. KLOSTER advised that Secs. 15-17, relates to the declaration
added to all questioned ballots that the Division of Elections
had requested. Sec. 18, changes the terminology of early voting
and adds the designation of an early voting station.
MS. KLOSTER advised that in approximately 2014, there was an
effort by a number of organizations such as, "Get Out the Native
Vote, AFN" to have early voting stations in a number of the
state's rural areas offering everyone access to early voting.
Under this section, the language keeps those early voting
stations consistent every single year so every Alaskan has the
opportunity to early vote. Secs. 19-22, relates to early voting
terminology updates. Sec. 23, allows for voter registration
updates. Currently, when a person votes and includes their
information, they update their voter registration on the day
they are voting. However, she pointed out, under the current
practice, the voter registration is not updated if the person
voted by facsimile or email, and this is one of the clean-up
areas the division requested. Therefore, if a person votes by
facsimile or email, all of their information would be updated.
2:38:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD referred to Sec. 21, and asked Ms.
Kloster to focus on any major changes in the section, and the
intent of the sponsor.
MS. KLOSTER reiterated that AS 15.20.064 is related to early
voting and if a voter's eligibility to vote could not be
verified by the election official during the early voting
process, they would vote an absentee questioned ballot. The
ballot would then go through an additional review process by the
Division of Elections to ensure the person was eligible before
the vote was counted, she explained.
2:40:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked how that process was different
from the current process.
MS. KLOSTER answered that it is additional language to clarify
in statute that in the event a voter was voting a questioned
ballot this is the review process to follow. She deferred to
the Division of Elections.
2:41:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD referred to Sec. 21, and offered concern
that the results of the election may be delayed and asked
whether that issue had been addressed.
MS. KLOSTER deferred to the Division of Elections, and referred
to the PFD voter initiative, wherein when signing up for the
permanent fund dividend (PFD), the person would be registered to
vote. She pointed out that there should not be a huge impact
because more people will be registered to vote after signing up
for the PFD.
2:42:36 PM
MS. KLOSTER, in continuing the sectional analysis, explained as
follows: Sec. 22 changes terminology to early voting; Sec. 23
relates to updating voter registration via email and facsimile;
and Sec. 24 is a new subsection. Current absentee ballot
language read that if a person preferred an absentee ballot each
year they had to fill out an application. This language
requests permanent absentee voting such that a person signing up
could stipulate they preferred to receive an absentee ballot to
their home every single year without the necessity of applying.
However, she said, should the mail be returned, the person would
fall off the list of voters automatically receiving an absentee
ballot each year. Also, she explained, the person receiving the
absentee ballot must vote every year, and if they have not voted
within four years the absentee ballot would not continue to be
sent to the person and they would be required to re-apply in
order to participate, and they do not, at all, fall off the
voter rolls.
2:43:45 PM
MS. KLOSTER advised that Sec. 25 relates to [a voter changing
party affiliation within 30 days before the primary election]
wherein they vote an absentee in-person, special, or questioned
ballot [with the voter's new affiliation indicated on the
voter's certificate attesting that the information is true and
correct], which appears on the envelope. Sec. 26, she said,
offers that "electronic signature" has the meaning given in
existing AS 09.80.190.
2:44:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to Sec. 25 of the bill, page 11,
lines 11-12, and the "30th day" references designating an
individual's party affiliation. Although, he said, the next few
lines read that if a person changed their party, the new party
kicks in. He asked why it was necessary to designate both
because it's whatever party they are a member of on election
day, and also it's whatever party at the 30th day. He asked
whether that language was required to tell the Division of
Elections what absentee ballots to mail, and asked the
significance of keeping those two contradictory pieces of
language.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK answered that currently, the language is 30
days before the primary election, and "then we have this
condition," and paraphrased as follows: "If a voter changes
party affiliation within 30 days then the voter shall vote an
absentee, in-person, special needs, or questioned ballot at the
primary election with the voter's new party ..." He explained
that within 10 days of the election a person can change their
party affiliation "as you early vote," and this was added to
keep everything consistent up to the same day voting. He
reiterated that a person can use that ballot envelope to update
any information they would like to update, including changing
party affiliation. Although, he said, he was unsure why the
language was drafted in this manner and that Legislative Legal
and Research Services may discuss this issue at a later time.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD commented that she has concerns
regarding Sec. 25, and she would speak with the sponsor's
office.
2:46:54 PM
MS. KLOSTER referred to Sec. 27 and advised it refers to the
early voting change in terminology; Sec. 28 is conforming
language for same day voter registration; Sec. 29 repeals
information dealing with the same day voter registration of a 30
day requirement; Sec. 30 relates to Transitional Provisions:
Regulations; and Sec. 31 is the effective date.
CHAIR CLAMAN opened public testimony on HB 1.
2:48:18 PM
EUGENE HABERMAN, Unincorporated Area of the Matanuska-Susitna
Borough, said he represents himself and added that the comments
he made earlier today on HB 200 reflect his comments on this
bill. He referred to the phrase "poll watcher" in HB 1, and
asked what happens after the election when dealing with the
ballots. He said he is denied his right to observe counting the
ballots and verifying they are legitimate before opening the
envelopes, and so forth. In the past, he said, Anchorage sent
out letters advising it had rejected the ballot envelope and the
person had an opportunity to appeal, but last night there was
the situation in which it did not provide that opportunity. He
referred to the lower voter turnout in the local and state
elections and noted there were occasions where there were
differences of a few votes as to who won the election. He said,
"when you do not have an opportunity for a party to be told
beforehand that their ballot is not going to be counted and
their right to appeal" creates a situation where someone would
say the elections weren't legitimate, and that's what's going on
at the state level. He reminded the committee of the last state
primary election where there was a court proceeding, and what
stood out was that the "head of elections" went on record
advising "that she's going to do on the job training." He
expressed that the person in charge of election should not be
learning on the job, and the lack of education of the party
responsible for state elections leads the situation to where
legitimacy cannot be shown to be valid.
2:51:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked that Mr. Haberman e-mail his
testimony to Chair Claman's office or her office.
CHAIR CLAMAN, in response to Representative Reinbold, advised
that Eugene Carl Haberman was testifying.
2:52:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN commented that he appreciated Mr.
Haberman's concern with regard to someone's vote not being
counted with no opportunity to appeal, and noted that if that is
the case in current state law it should be reviewed. He related
that he knows of an individual who received that letter in mail
advising that their vote did not count, and when the person
tried to figure out why, the division could not find any reason
why it would have not let the person vote.
2:53:05 PM
MICHAEL HAWFIELD said he represents himself, he agrees with Mr.
Haberman's concerns, and he looks forward to Representative
Chris Tuck pursuing some of those issues. He expressed strong
support for HB 1, and noted that during the last election while
assisting new voters regarding how the process worked, he
particularly noted that voters who wanted to vote early but
didn't know much about registration. He remarked that this
effort to clarify and streamline the whole process of
registration, and especially early voting is very important. He
stressed that there are so many younger people turned off to the
whole process of voting, which is a significant part of the
depression of voter response in Alaska's elections. The
sanctity of elections is paramount and he related that he
applauds the work by Representative Tuck in creating a bill that
will help immensely.
2:55:12 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN listed the people available for questions. After
ascertaining that no one wished to testify, closed public
testimony on HB 1.
2:55:43 PM
CAROL THOMPSON, Absentee & Petition Manager, Division of
Elections, Office of the Lieutenant Governor, in response to
Chair Claman, said she was unsure she should address whether the
administration supported HB 1 because it was a question for the
director of the division, and she was not prepared to answer the
question.
2:56:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to a previous question regarding
page 2, lines 1-2 of the bill, and asked why the bill retains
lines 1-2 as is, and paraphrased: "(4) ... as required under AS
15.07 and is not registered to vote in another jurisdiction."
He asked whether this bill provides for automatic un-
registration in another jurisdiction when the person registers
to vote, whether that process was relatively instantaneous, and
if that was the case, why does the stipulation remain that the
person cannot be registered in another jurisdiction.
2:57:34 PM
MS. THOMPSON explained that within current voter registration, a
person must be registered 30 days prior to an election. This
particular language speaks to the fact that a person cannot be
registered to vote in another jurisdiction or another state, and
people would have been able to notify those states of the
person's cancellation through Alaska's voter registration
application, or they could contact the state itself and request
cancellation. As far as the intention of the bill, at this
point, how that would be addressed at the same day registration
level would have to be determined. She remarked that at this
point, with regard to a person not on a precinct register, if
they go to a polling place on election day and vote a questioned
ballot, the question of whether the person was registered in
another state is not on that particular envelope and would have
to be addressed in some manner through the sponsor's bill.
2:58:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN noted this is not new language being
added, and asked whether there was a discrepancy.
MS. THOMPSON reiterated that, at this point, the question was
not on the envelope, although, it is part of the voter oath in
the declaration at the bottom of the ballot, which read as
follows:
... I am not registered to vote in another state, or I
have taken the necessary steps to cancel that
registration. ...
2:59:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX pointed out that currently it is not
necessary for a voter to be registered within 30 days of an
election when voting for a presidential candidate. Therefore,
she said, if there is any language or anything that needs to be
done to un-register oneself from another jurisdiction it
presumably should be performed by the Division of Elections, or
this bill can take care of it, hopefully.
3:00:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP referred to Secs. 1 and 8 of the bill,
noting that Sec. 1 addressed voting in a house district
indirectly, and Sec. 8 addressed that issue directly. He asked
whether a person could vote the down ballot for a house district
representative if they moved into the house district that same
day.
MS. THOMPSON responded that currently, a person would go to
their polling place on election day and if their name does not
appear on the precinct register, they are afforded the
opportunity to vote the questioned ballot. Or, in the event
they indicated they no longer live in that particular district,
they are afforded the opportunity to vote a questioned ballot.
The questioned ballot envelope, she explained, allows the voter
to list their current address and when those questioned ballots
come back from the polling place to the Division of Elections it
performs a review of their information on the database system.
In the event there is a conflict of districts, the division does
not count the house district portion and it works its way up the
ballot. The process, she explained, is that the division would
start with the house district and whether the person was
registered at the same senate district, and in the event they
are registered in the same senate district the division would
count that race. She related that should the voter not be
registered in the house or senate districts; the division would
count all of the statewide races.
3:01:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP questioned whether it was current law that a
person must be registered in a house district for 30 days to
vote that particular seat on the ballot.
MS. THOMPSON answered in the affirmative.
3:02:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP referred to Senate Bill 9 [passed in the
Twenty-Ninth Alaska State Legislature] and described it as a
significant elections reform bill. He noted that part of the
bill was to encourage voter notification and updating state
voter registration rolls through an ability to partner with
nonprofit cooperative efforts lead by states rather than the
federal government. He asked whether the program had been
implemented.
MS. THOMPSON responded that in 2016, the division performed
outreach using the Electronic Registration Information Center
(ERIC) program. The division performed outreach to all 2016 un-
registered voters advising they could register to vote. This
year, she offered, the division will work to match Alaska's list
against other state lists to determine whether voters may be
registered in more than one state, and the division will
continue to work that process.
3:03:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX offered a scenario that someone moved into
House District A from House District B, and had not changed
their registration until they arrived at the polling place, or
they changed their registration through an absentee ballot they
received while living in House District B. Except, she said,
they voted when they were in House District A, indicating a
different address. She asked whether their vote for either
House District A or B counted.
MS. THOMPSON answered that voters have only one ballot, the
division would determine which house district they resided in
and compare it with the house district they voted and if they
were not registered in the same house district as the ballot,
that portion of the ballot would not count and it is considered
a partially counted ballot.
3:04:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX explained that she was talking about a
voter receiving their [absentee] ballot before they moved, but
hadn't yet voted their ballot. Then, on election day the voter
decides they don't want to go to the polls and votes the ballot
they lugged from their prior address. The voter then fills out
the [absentee ballot] with all of the statewide candidates, the
senate, and House District B, and the voter also lists on their
absentee ballot an affirmation of their address. When the
division looks at the address it realizes the person was no
longer living in House District B, and was actually living in
House District A. She said she assumed the ballot where they
voted for the candidate running in House District B, yet showing
an address in House District A, doesn't count. She asked
whether she was correct.
MS. THOMPSON explained that the person requesting an absentee
ballot by mail must submit their absentee ballot application
first. The division receives the voter's application, processes
the application with their residence address, and the ballot
sent to the person is based upon their residence address. The
voter then receives the absentee ballot envelope with the
signature, witnessing, and identifier requirements. In that
situation, she explained, if the person was registered in the
district 30 days before the election and that is the residence
address the division has on file, that is the ballot the
division sends to them and that ballot would be counted in full.
Although, she said, if the person provided the division with
their application after the 30 day registration deadline with
the new residence address, the division would send them the
ballot for that district; however, it would not count because
they did not register in the district timely.
3:07:26 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN offered a scenario of a person living in
Representative LeDoux's district 30 days before the election,
but they move to Chair Claman's district 15 days before the
election, and the person receives an early ballot in the mail
listing Chair Claman's district. Under HB 1, the division would
send the person the ballot for the new district because they
would be re-registered in Chair Claman's district and receive
that ballot, he asked.
MS. THOMPSON answered that the intention of the bill is to allow
for same day registration so long as the person had been a
resident of the district for 30 days. She related that there
would have to be some type of process, or some sort of
notification on the envelope itself that read "I've been a
resident of a district for 30 days," that the sponsor may
consider. It would still come back to that 30 day requirement
of being a resident in that district, to determine whether or
not the person would be eligible to vote that house or senate
district ballot, she explained.
3:08:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX opined that when she voted an absentee
ballot it asked for her address.
MS. THOMPSON interjected that in the event Representative LeDoux
was discussing absentee ballot by mail, there is not a question
on the ballot as to the person's residence address. The person
simply signs the ballot, has it witnessed, and provides an
identifier because under state law those three items are
required. The person must first apply in order to receive the
ballot, which is where the application states that the person
must provide a residence address.
3:09:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK referred to Chair Claman's scenario
regarding someone moving into his district and voting by mail,
and said that it would be an absentee ballot for Representative
LeDoux's district because the requirement is that they must live
in Chair Claman's district within the 30 day time requirement.
In that situation, he explained, the division would not even
have known to change the ballot to Chair Claman's district until
the person changed their voter registration to Chair Claman's
district.
3:10:28 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN, in response to Representative Reinbold, advised he
did not plan to put HB 1 on the calendar tomorrow and the
Division of Elections would be available when the bill was next
heard.
3:11:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to Sec. 15.10.170, page 5 of the
bill, and opined that a person, as a member of a ballot group or
party, or a candidate, is allowed a poll watcher. Although, he
noted, if they are a member of a group trying to become a party
they do not receive a poll watcher.
MS. THOMPSON responded that it is the interpretation of the
Division of Elections that it does allow for a person affiliated
with a small minor party, or a political group. She then
referred to [Sec. 15.10.170, page 5, lines 2-6] and paraphrased
as follows:
(a) In a general election, special election, or
special runoff election under AS 15.40.141, a [THE]
precinct party committee, where an organized precinct
committee exists, or the party district committee
where no organized precinct committee exists, or the
state party chair [CHAIRPERSON] ...
MS. THOMPSON explained those would be the four recognized
political parties of the State of Alaska at this time, Democrat,
Republican, Alaska Independent, and Libertarian Parties. She
continued paraphrasing the section as follows:
(a)... where neither a precinct nor a party district
committee exists, may appoint one or more [PERSONS AS]
watchers in each precinct and counting center.
MS. THOMPSON further explained that that allows for watchers.
She continued paraphrasing the section as follows:
(a)... A [FOR ANY ELECTION. EACH] candidate not
representing a political party may appoint one or more
watcher for each precinct or counting center in the
candidate's respective district of the state [FOR ANY
ELECTION].
MS. THOMPSON explained that any other candidate appearing on the
ballot is allowed to have [one or more] watcher.
3:13:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN restated his question and referred to the
un-recognized Veterans' Party that does not have candidates in
all of the different precincts and districts. In the districts
where the Veterans' Party does not have a candidate to grab a
poll watcher, and the candidate was not a member of a state
recognized party to receive a poll watcher, he asked how they
would receive a poll watcher.
MS. THOMPSON paraphrased that it read: "a candidate not
representing a political party." The Veterans' Group, she
explained, would be a political group that had not met political
party status, and opined that the Veterans' Group would fall
under that definition.
3:14:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN commented that he would have had the same
thoughts, except in a couple places in the statute when
discussing groups, "we specifically limit the group" receiving a
poll watcher to a group dealing with a ballot measure, for
example. In the event the group does not have that caveat, he
offered his belief that they did not qualify.
MS. THOMPSON commented that this may be an area for the sponsor
to specifically add "political groups."
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK responded that the only way a political
group would have a poll watcher, for example the "Veterans'
Group" is if it had a candidate in that district. In order to
have poll watchers outside of that district, he explained, they
would have to have someone at a higher level statewide candidate
or a senate candidate if they just wanted to look at poll
watchers. He said he agrees there is a limit in the language to
prevent poll watchers that do not necessarily have a candidate
in that election. However, in describing limitations put on
poll watchers, he offered the example that the Veterans' Group
having a candidate, referendum, proposition, initiative, or was
weighing in on an issue as a group, would be allowed a poll
watcher.
3:16:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether, currently, there is a
manner in which a person could appeal their vote not being
counted.
MS. THOMPSON answered there are specific Alaska statutes
advising the Division of Elections how to handle ballots missing
information, and the division is to reject those ballots under a
particular statute at this time.
3:17:00 PM
MS. THOMPSON, in response to Representative Eastman, agreed
there is no appeal process.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK opined that "when it does not affect the
outcome then it doesn't go to a higher level," but it does go to
a higher level if it can affect the outcome, and the Division of
Elections would contact those people individually. In the cases
where someone may have received a letter advising their ballot
didn't count, the person's ballot may not have had any effect on
the outcome of the election. For example, he offered, if there
were 50 of those uncounted votes with a 100 vote spread, those
ballots would not have an effect on the outcome. However, if
the vote spread was 25 votes, the Division of Elections would
contact people as there would be that additional layer, he
explained.
MS. THOMPSON explained that ballots are looked at again through
the recount process, but the division still has to follow the
guidelines of statute advising how to count or not count a
ballot. She further explained that a vote can be challenged
through the recount process, or even the observation process,
because during the division's process of reviewing ballots
candidates can have a person there to observe. In the event the
validity of the count of a ballot, or even the rejection of a
ballot, was challenged, the division would look at that
challenge and go back to the law, she said.
3:19:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN commented that during the last election
he personally went to his local Division of Elections to observe
the count in his own race, and he was told he could not observe
because the local office needed permission from the higher
office, and the higher office hadn't provided that permission so
he did not have that opportunity. He asked whether those
policies had changed since the last election.
MS. THOMPSON related that she was unaware of the exact
circumstances and was unable to address his question.
3:20:16 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN described the idea of cancelling a voter
registration in another state as akin to cancelling a driver's
license from another state. He related that a good part of the
bill is that when registering in Alaska, the person un-registers
in another state because the average public person probably
doesn't even know where to write to un-register. The states are
communicating with each other and it makes sense to check a box
and unregister in another jurisdiction. To the extent that is
lacking in the bill he encouraged a provision in that regard.
CHAIR CLAMAN referred to the effort to call all early voting
ballots "early voting" ballots, and that a questioned ballot
puts the ballot on hold in order to verify the information. He
opined that trying to define all the early and absentee and
other ballots as just early ballot is good. Although, he said,
in looking through the bill "you didn't do it very well" as
there should be a definition explaining that "early ballot
includes absentee and all the others, and then call them early
ballots throughout" because even though the goal is to say
"early and absentee," the bill has people showing up on election
day and receiving an absentee ballot. He surmised that the
people should either receive the actual ballot because it is
election day, or receive a questioned ballot, and then any
ballot prior to election day is called an early ballot. He
commented that he applauds the idea of simplifying the name so
people are not so confused, but it appears many absentee ballots
are still referenced in the bill and it would be useful to
clean-up that language.
[HB 1 was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB200 Draft Proposed ver U 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Sponsor Statement 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Explanation of Changes ver U 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Sectional Analysis ver U 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Bill Highlights 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 ver O 4.10.17.PDF |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Supporting Document-Washington Supreme Court Ruling 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Supporting Documents-Top 2 Primary FAQs for Candidates - Elections & Voting - WA Secretary of State 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Additional Document-Top Two Primaries Nationally 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Supporting Document-Letters 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Additional Document-Legal Opinion 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Additional Document-Leg Research Report Voter Turnout 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Supporting Document-Additional Letters of Support 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Opposing Document-Letters of Opposition 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB200 Fiscal Note OOG-DOE 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 200 |
| HB208 ver A 4.10.17.PDF |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 208 |
| HB208 Sponsor Statement 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 208 |
| HB208 Sectional Analysis ver A 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 208 |
| HB208 PowerPoint Sectional 4.10.17.pptx |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 208 |
| HB208 Supporting Document-Decanting Matrix 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 208 |
| HB208 Supporting Document-Decanting Rankings 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 208 |
| HB208 Supporting Document-Trust Estate Glossary 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 208 |
| HB208 Supporting Document-Letter Peak Trust Company 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 208 |
| HB208 Supporting Document-Letter Manley & Brautigam 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 208 |
| HB208 Supporting Document-Letter ABA 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 208 |
| HB208 Supporting Document-Letter Northern Law Group 4.10.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 208 |
| HB208 Fiscal Note LAW-CIV 4.7.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/10/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 208 |
| HB001 ver U 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 1 |
| HB001 Sponsor Statement 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 1 |
| HB001 Memo of Changes 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 1 |
| HB001 Supporting Document-PEW Report 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 1 |
| HB001 Supporting Document-Voting Information and Statistics 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 1 |
| HB001 Supporting Document-Letters of Support 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 1 |
| HB001 Supporting Document-Letter Alaska Community Action on Toxics 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/17/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 1 |
| HB001 Fiscal Note OOG-DOE 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 1 |
| HB013 ver O 4.14.17.PDF |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 13 |
| HB013 Sponsor Statement 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 13 |
| HB013 Explanation of Changes 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 13 |
| HB013 Supporting Document-Timeline for Korematsu's Resolution 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM |
HB 13 |
| HB013 Supporting Document-Korematsu v US 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 13 |
| HB013 Supporting Document-Research Document 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 13 |
| HB013 HJUD PowerPoint Presentation 4.14.17.pdf |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 13 |
| HB013 HJUD PowerPoint Presentation 4.14.17.pptx |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 13 |
| HB013 Fiscal Note OOG-OMB 4.14.17.PDF |
HJUD 4/14/2017 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/15/2017 10:00:00 AM |
HB 13 |